Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
August 30, 1809
The National Intelligencer And Washington Advertiser
Washington, District Of Columbia
What is this article about?
The editorial references a Boston Repository article on the President's recent proclamation reinstating U.S. trade interdictions, as conditions under the June 28th law for lifting the Non-Intercourse Act were unmet. The writer hesitates but concurs that the President was duty-bound to enforce the legislature's acts.
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
Since the publication of our last paper we have received another number of the Boston Repository, which adds to the labor at least so far as to the correctness of the measures lately taken by the President.
"On a subject, which we are informed has employed able pens on opposite grounds, and which we have not yet had time to examine maturely, we hesitate at pronouncing at once a decided opinion. Our impression on reading the Proclamation was, that the president, finding that the conditions on which alone Congress authorizes the removal of the Non-Intercourse, had never existed, found himself in duty bound to give notice, that the commerce of the United States must of course return to its horrid state of interdiction. From the slight attention we have been able to pay to the arguments, and from our recollection of the acts relating to the subject, we are yet of that opinion. The provision in the law, of June 28th, which excepted our trade with G. B. from the interdictions of that law, was predicated essentially on a condition; and that condition was, that the trade restored, was restored conformable to the nonintercourse act of March.
"It therefore appears to us that whatever disposition the President might have to perpetuate the relief to us, which he gave by his first proclamation, he was compelled by the nature of the act of June 28th, the last on the subject, to let the acts of our national legislature take their course."
"On a subject, which we are informed has employed able pens on opposite grounds, and which we have not yet had time to examine maturely, we hesitate at pronouncing at once a decided opinion. Our impression on reading the Proclamation was, that the president, finding that the conditions on which alone Congress authorizes the removal of the Non-Intercourse, had never existed, found himself in duty bound to give notice, that the commerce of the United States must of course return to its horrid state of interdiction. From the slight attention we have been able to pay to the arguments, and from our recollection of the acts relating to the subject, we are yet of that opinion. The provision in the law, of June 28th, which excepted our trade with G. B. from the interdictions of that law, was predicated essentially on a condition; and that condition was, that the trade restored, was restored conformable to the nonintercourse act of March.
"It therefore appears to us that whatever disposition the President might have to perpetuate the relief to us, which he gave by his first proclamation, he was compelled by the nature of the act of June 28th, the last on the subject, to let the acts of our national legislature take their course."
What sub-type of article is it?
Economic Policy
Trade Or Commerce
Foreign Affairs
What keywords are associated?
Non Intercourse Act
Presidential Proclamation
Trade Interdiction
June 28th Law
Commerce Relief
What entities or persons were involved?
President
Congress
Boston Repository
G. B.
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Presidential Proclamation On Non Intercourse Act Enforcement
Stance / Tone
Hesitant Agreement With Presidential Action As Legally Required
Key Figures
President
Congress
Boston Repository
G. B.
Key Arguments
Conditions For Removing Non Intercourse Never Existed
President Duty Bound To Reinstate Trade Interdiction
June 28th Law Predicated On Conformity To March Non Intercourse Act
President Compelled By Legislature To Let Acts Take Course