Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Demidog
It wasn't directed at a single country? ... The act was in response to the British and French and was intended to persuade them to stop their restrictive acts.

Yeah, but Jefferson did pass the Nonimportation Act, in 1806, forbidding the importation of specified British goods. And then after determining that the Embargo Act of 1807 didn't work Thomas Jefferson gave his assent, although reluctantly, to the Nonintercourse Act of 1809 that opened trade to everyone except with Britain and France. He knew what regulate meant, why did he sign those?

I gotta figure Jefferson was just pulling another Louisiana Purchase deal where he knew it wasn't constitutional but felt it had to be done given how England was forcibly enrolling our sailors as recruits for military duty. But I wish he had tried to fight for passage of an Amendment to do those things, it would have set the right precedents for future governments.

281 posted on 03/03/2002 7:25:53 PM PST by Gumption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies ]


To: Gumption
"...the Nonintercourse Act of 1809..."

OMG!!!

You're kidding! Intercourse is unconstitutional?

293 posted on 03/04/2002 4:08:18 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]

To: Gumption
He knew what regulate meant, why did he sign those?

Because he was angry at france and England is my conclusion. And your bringing up the Louisianna purchase is perfectly appropriate in my view. It is another example of where Jefferson decided to circumvent the constitution....I believe he admitted it too didn't he? Proving that even he wasn't averse to that in certain circumstances.

300 posted on 03/04/2002 5:45:42 AM PST by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson