On the 1st of May, 1810, Congress passed a further Act, excluding British and French armed vessels from the waters of the United States, but providing that if either of these nations should modify its edicts by the 3rd of March, 1811, of which fact the President was to give notice by proclamation, and the other did not, within three months after, pursue a similar course, commercial intercourse with the first might be renewed, but not with the second. It, however, appears that while Napoleon was intriguing with the American minister in Paris to concert hostile anti-commercial measures against England, he had issued on the 5th of August, 1810, the Trianon Decree,[291] ordering the sale of all American vessels seized, and the proceeds to be paid into the treasury. In spite, however, of this perfidy, the United States came to an understanding with Napoleon, that they would, as he desired, “cause their flag to be respected,” that is, break with England, provided their vessels were released, and provision made for their enjoying the monopoly of the continental carrying trade. [Sidenote: Partiality of the United States towards France.] [Sidenote: Contentions at home respecting the Orders in Council.] Accordingly, on the 2nd of November, 1810, the President issued his proclamation declaring the French decrees revoked, thus renewing intercourse between the United States and France; and on the 10th of the same month another proclamation appeared, interdicting commercial intercourse with England.[292] These antagonistic demonstrations were accompanied with a vast amount of popular declamation against England, and as Napoleon was then rising to the height of his ambitious career, the people of the United States were, it is to be feared, ready to be his acquiescing instruments in assisting to rivet the chains of the nations of Europe, provided they were secured the monopoly of the carrying trade, to the displacement of English shipping. But whatever motives may have governed their conduct, whether mere commercial interest, or a more broad national policy, it is beyond controversy that in the negotiations and language held throughout there was a marked partiality towards France and her ruler, and a corresponding coldness and animosity against England. This disposition of the United States to display subserviency to the French emperor, and their hostile temper towards Great Britain, daily increased, but it was not until 1812 that the long smouldering ashes of suppressed enmity broke out into open hostilities.[293] In England the contentions which arose respecting the Orders in Council shook the commercial peace of the country. Every man espoused the side with which his own peculiar interests were interwoven, claiming, however, to be the infallible guide upon the subject to all his countrymen. Mr. Alexander Baring, the second son of Sir Francis Baring, who had passed many years in the United States, where he and his brother Henry had formed matrimonial