The exceptions, the qualifications, and the verbiage of the British Orders need no notice. The ablest British merchants gave up in despair the attempt to understand them; and as one order followed rapidly upon another, explaining, correcting, and developing Perceval’s not too lucid style, the angry Liberals declared their belief that he intended no man to understand them without paying two guineas for a legal opinion, with the benefit of a chance to get a directly contrary opinion for the sum of two guineas more.[80] Besides the express provisions contained in the Order of November 11, it was understood that American commerce with the enemies of England must not only pass through British ports with British license, but that colonial produce would be made to pay a tax to the British Treasury to enhance its price, while cotton would not be allowed to enter France. The general intention, however confused, was simple. After November 11, 1807, any American vessel carrying any cargo was liable to capture if it sailed for any port in Europe from which the British flag was excluded. In other words, American commerce was made English. This measure completed, diplomacy was to resume its work. Even Canning’s audacity might be staggered to explain how the government of the United States could evade war after it should fairly understand the impressment Proclamation of October 17, the Order in Council of November 11, and the Instructions of George Henry Rose,--who was selected by Canning as his special envoy for the adjustment of the “Leopard’s” attack on the “Chesapeake,” and who carried orders which made adjustment impossible. Such outrages could be perpetrated only upon a helpless people. Even in England, where Jefferson’s pacific policy was well understood, few men believed that peace could be longer preserved. FOOTNOTES: [56] See vol. iii. p. 416. [57] Cobbett’s Debates, Feb. 4, 1807, viii. 620-656. [58] Napoleon to Champagny, Aug. 19, 1807; Correspondance, xv. 509. [59] Same to Same, Aug. 24, 1807; Ibid., p. 542. [60] Parliamentary Inquiry, 1808; Evidence of Robert Shedden and Mr. Hadley. [61] Castlereagh to Perceval, Oct. 1, 1807; Castlereagh Correspondence, viii. 87. [62] Original Suggestions to the Cabinet, Oct. 12, 1807; Perceval MSS. [63] Opinion of the Duke of Portland; Perceval MSS. [64] Stapleton’s Canning, p. 411. [65] Opinion of the Earl of Westmoreland; Perceval MSS. [66] Opinion of Lord Hawkesbury; Perceval MSS. [67] Opinion of Lord Castlereagh; Perceval MSS. [68] Opinion of Mr. Canning; Perceval MSS. [69] First Draft of Orders in Council, with remarks by Earl Bathurst; Perceval MSS. [70] Opinion of Lord Bathurst in dissent to the Principle of Mr. Perceval’s proposed Order; Perceval MSS. [71] Lord Bathurst to Spencer Perceval, Nov. 5, 1807; Perceval MSS. [72] Spencer Perceval to Speaker Abbot; Diary and Correspondence of Lord Colchester, ii. 134. [73] Erskine to Madison, Feb. 23, 1808; State Papers, iii. 209.