calculated, essentially, to vary the situation of the United States.
The proclamation of neutrality which was treated as a royal edict, was
not only considered as assuming powers not belonging to the executive,
and, as evidencing the monarchical tendencies of that department, but
as demonstrating the disposition of the government to break its
connexions with France, and to dissolve the friendship which united
the people of the two republics. The declaration that "the duty and
interest of the United States required that they should with sincerity
and good faith adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial
towards the belligerent powers," gave peculiar umbrage. The scenes of
the revolutionary war were brought into review; the object and effect
of British hostility were painted in glowing colours; and the
important aids afforded by France were drawn with a pencil not less
animated. That the conduct of Britain, since the treaty of peace had
furnished unequivocal testimony of enmity to the United States, was
strongly pressed. With this continuing enmity was contrasted the
amicable dispositions professed by the French republic; and it was
asked with indignation, whether the interests of the United States
required that they should pursue "a line of conduct entirely impartial
between these two powers? That the services of the one as well as the
injuries of the other, should be forgotten? that a friend and an enemy
should be treated with equal favour? and that neither gratitude nor
resentment should constitute a feature of the American character?" The
supposed freedom of the French was opposed to the imagined slavery of
the English; and it was demanded whether "the people of America were
alike friendly to republicanism and to monarchy? to liberty and to
despotism?"

With infectious enthusiasm it was contended, that there was a natural
and inveterate hostility between monarchies and republics; that the