more just as respects our commercial rights? Can we persuade ourselves that Great Britain will permit our vessels to pass to the Continent unmolested? Again, what assurances have we that the vessels and cargoes which might arrive in France will be received and respected? This is inconceivable to me, and must only be the reverie of a fertile imagination. Past experience should prove to us the delusion of such a doctrine; we cannot deduce such inferences from the data, detailed in the letters of Jackson and Champagny, as communicated to us in the President's Message of November last. H. of R. quished; we are degraded beneath the rank of colonies; nevertheless, some of our merchants, who pretend to reputation and character, do not hesitate to accede to the terms of this diabolical system of oppression. Under a state of things like this, who can pretend that "virtue is honored, and vice always detested," or that, as republican citizens, "we fear blame more than punishment?" Facts have lately been published which prove to what extent this fraud on nations is carried in Britain. I will call to your recollection the case of "the Good Hope, a neutral vessel, 'laden with brandy and bound from Rochelle to 'Hull; she was captured and sent into England; she was tried on the 7th of November last before the British Admiralty Court; her license had expired, but Sir William Scott observed, that under the obstructions existing in respect to the tion should be given to the licenses. She was therefore restored, paying the captor's expenses." The Mercury, under similar circumstances, was tried at the same time, and was restored with freight and expenses. What American who has ever heard of the spirit of 1776, would not resist such infringements of neutral rights, and such violations of sovereignty? This state of things reminds me of the answer made by Anacharsis to Solon, when he conversed with him about his intended reformation in the State: "Alas!" said he, "all your laws will be found to resemble spider webs; the weak and small flies will be caught, and entangled, but the great and powerful will always have strength enough to break through." Should this bill finally pass this House, I think we may reasonably conclude that the following will certainly be some of the consequences of its adoption. 6 That Great Britain will not permit the operation of this bill, as respects the Continent of Europe, must be evident to every reflecting mind who will take the pains to collect the facts detailed in the debates of the House of Commons prior to our independence; she evinced an hos-commerce of England, the most liberal constructility to the progress of these States, as respects her commerce and manufactures, as early as the year 1763. It is unnecessary for me to relate the particular restrictions; they may be seen by referring to Parliamentary debates, vol. 28, p. 207. I will also refer you to the questions proposed to the celebrated Franklin by the British House of Commons; the questions prove the uneasiness of the Government, fearing that we should meet with success in our manufactures, and the answers do immortal honor to the American patriot. At this period it was a popular sentiment in Great Britain, concerning these States, then colonies, "that everything was to be dreaded from their increase of population and skill in agriculture, the arts, and manufactures." As early as the year 1750, the British Parliament enacted, that no slitting mill or forge, or any iron works, should be established in America. The British have ever been desirous to keep us in the "gristle," and Our sovereignty being thus prostrated, the lion, were intent upon preventing our ever hardening once laid low, will resume his dominion, and triinto manhood. They always entertained views umphantly tyrannize over all mankind. equally hostile towards Ireland; and their system banners of Britain, with her system of oppresof oppression is continued, although they have sion, will be carried from pole to. pole; her former incorporated Ireland as a part of the British em- restless colonies will not pass unobserved. Let pire. Can we for a moment suppose that she me ask, would it not be more becoming the dig-` now will favor our commercial intercourse? We nity of a weak nation, by a voluntary offer on cannot for a moment allow that Great Britain her part, to reassume her former secondary charwill admit our communication with the Conti-acter? We might then have some pretensions to nent of Europe, unless under her infernal system of granting a license to trade. Permit me to take a short review of the principles and practice adopted on these occasions. How ill-founded in principle to carry on a trade with nations with The passage of this bill will certainly lead to whom they are at war, and to interdict the same a war with one or both of the great belligerent trade to neutrals, unless they act under a special Powers of Europe, for, according to the Orders license! This is in direct proof that "self-interet in Council, we dare not trade with France and is, among nations, certainly the great moving her dependencies; according to the decrees of principle; no national measure, perhaps, is, at France, we dare not trade with Great Britain any time, the result of pure generosity or good and her dependencies. This bill admits of a trade 'will." Forged papers are issued, and vessels ar- with both Powers, under the restriction, that it rive from one European port in another, in the is done by means of vessels wholly American. course of a few days, as if they had been carried Since neither of the belligerents will rescind by magic influence across the wide spreading wa- their orders or decrees to enforce a law founded ters of the ocean, from the United States. Can on this bill, we must permit our merchantmen to we, for a moment, think of a submission like arm for their defence; the consequence of which this? Our national sovereignty is thereby relin-will be resistance to attacks from either bellige The the protection and mercy of our ancient parent State; nay, we might deceive the world, by declaring that it was the wish of the majority of the sovereign people. rent. Thus shall we be led to hostilities with both of them. I am opposed to this system. It is well for us to avoid a contest with either of them, and far better to avoid it with both. If we are to adopt a preference in favor of one or other of the belligerents, since they will not act upon fair principles themselves, it is proper that we should take a fair view of the American commerce carried on with Great Britain, and that with the Continent of Europe. It is of moment to determine which of the two is the most advantageous to the United States. This can only be answered by taking a correct view of the extent and importacce of each, as shall be demonstrated by a reference to the amount of our exports and imports to and from each of those countries. We will now proceed to this investigation; it shall be founded upon the official reports of the Secretary of the Treasury. I will take the calculations for three years-1802, 1803, and 1804. In the year 1802, domestic produce was exported to Europe to the amount of - $36,180,000 Foreign articles exported same year 35,775,000 JANUARY, 1810. So that, if a trade had been carried on with Great Britain, and that with the Continent had been relinquished for the three years mentioned, we should have sustained the enormous loss of profit, arising on the exports, of $134,229,954. This, at ten per cent., would amount to very little less than $14,000,000-nearly $5,000,000 per an num. It might also be further remarked, that many shipments made to English ports do not remain in Great Britain, they are frequently consigned to a market on the Continent, the arrangement being an accommodation to the convenience of commerce. This would consid erably lessen the amount of British commerce with the United States. All our exports to the Continent remain and are consumed there. Independent of the amount, we may try this question in another way; we furnish England with raw materials necessary to her existence; she returns to us those materials manufactured; thus she derives a considerable profit on her industry, amounting to a balance of $14,000,000 annually against the United States, according to the most favorable calculations. We might our selves, if we pursued a proper system, save all this to the State, and thus should we be more happy and independent. There are two ways of effecting this great purpose-first, either by ou abandoning such articles as are not necessary to the comforts of civilized life, of which there are many; and, secondly, by an application of the industry of our fellow-citizens to such raw mate last I should give the preference, and we must rials as are usually shipped to England. To this one day or other resort to it if we wish to retai our national sovereignty. All writers and all nations consider a system of national industry, properly directed, as the true source of national wealth and power. In proportion as we are l Of our domestic articles in the year 1802, Great Brit-dustrious, so are we happy. Man, naturally prone ain received in amount Foreign articles - $19,014,943 to idleness, is too apt to indulge, and thus to fall 4,910,148 into apathy ill becoming his nature. By rousing our national spirit, and exercising our industry at home, we shall be led to an investigation of our internal resources, the extent of which we are as yet unacquainted with; the importance of $23,925,091 In 1803, Great Britain received of domestic articles which can only be deduced by the utility and $25,369,073 In 1804, Great Britain received domestic articles to the value of $19,346,517 2,488,285 Foreign Total for 1804 $21,829,802 $23,597,903 Deducting the amount of exports, both domestic and foreign, which Great Britain receives of the United States, from the amount total of exports, made to Europe, we shall find the balance in favor of the Continent as follows: For the year 1802 1803 1804 JANUARY, 1810. American Navigation Act. H. OF R. should be known to all, that they might govern themselves accordingly. and, according to an intelligent writer, "iron mines seem to be put into men's hands as the instruments of their own independence;" our beds The Committee rose at a little past 4 o'clock, of mineral coal are not yet sufficiently traced, without taking a question on Mr. PICKMAN's moand coal has been emphatically termed "the souition, reported progress, and obtained leave to sit and mainspring of British wealth." It would be again. an endless task to recount what we have. I ask you to tell me what useful productions we have not? Our population is already considerable, and the genius diffused through it stands unrivalled by foreign competitors. The true spirit of liberty, founded upon wisdom and principles of sound policy, will lead the persecuted to come to us from abroad, and the mildness and equality of our laws will confirm them in the just rights of men, P by securing to them every blessing which civil liberty, and the application of their industry, can furnish. This subject is inexhaustible; to the nation it is all important. I was led astray by the magnitude of the object, and ask of you pardon for this aberration. Upon the internal resources are based the glory, the happiness, the prosperity, and, above all, the independence of my country. This is my apology for the digression. I shall vote against the bill. It was my intention to have taken a minute view of the tendency of each of the sections of this bill. This, I concluded, was unnecessary, as in my opinion its provisions, under existing circumstances, cannot be carried into operation. Therefore, I have directed my attention to the general principle upon which it is founded; and this cannot be put into practice. Why, then, shall we pass a bill which cannot be carried into operation? WEDNESDAY, January 10. Mr. VAN HORN presented a petition of sundry inhabitants of the City of Washington, praying that an act may be passed directing the Marshal for the District of Columbia to receive and take into his custody the bodies of persons taken in execution of writs of capias ad satisfaciendum, issued on judgments rendered by a single magistrate, in cases where the judgment should not exceed twenty dollars.-Referred to the Committee for the District of Columbia. AMERICAN NAVIGATION ACT. The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the bill concerning commercial intercourse with Great Britain and France. The motion for striking out the 5th section yet under consideration. Mr. MONTGOMERY said, that upon a question of so much national importance as that immediately under consideration, he could not reconcile it to his feelings or his sense of duty to give a mere vote, and not to give his views of the subject. The motion to strike out the section involved in his opinion the whole merits of the bill, and on motions of this kind, so broad in their effects, a latitude had been allowed to gentlemen, and they Mr. Ross viewed it in the same light. He said were permitted to take wide range, and consider it was a truth to which gentlemen shut their eyes, all the principles contained in the bill. He should, but of which they as well as the people would be concisely, take this course. My opinion, said he, if they were not now convinced that nothing short is that the more deliberately and fully the princiof actual force could give protection to commerce. ples of the bill shall be investigated, and its bearInstead of such a milk and water measure he ings understood, the more it will be found conwished to see a provision authorizing the Presi-formable to the Message of the President, protecdent to fit out the whole Navy of the United States and send it to sea, and authorizing the merchants to arm in defence of their lawful com tive of the honor of the nation, and promotive of its commercial interests. At the commencement of the present session we received a Message from the President. Exticularly that part of it referred to the Committee amine the ground taken in the Message, and parof Foreign Relations, and compare it with the principles of the bill, and it will be found that the one is strictly conformable with the other. The President informed us he had broken off all further communication with Francis James Jackson, the British Minister, in consequence of his insolent and intolerant conduct, but that he had left the way still open for the negotiation through any other organ; that he was still ready to receive communications through any other less offensive accredited person, who should conduct himself with proper decorum and decency. This certainly is not a war stand. The President, like his predecessor, is for keeping the door still open for amicable adjustment of our differences with the belligerents, and avoiding a state of war as long as is consistent with national honor. This is the policy adopted in the Message, and there is H. OF R. : American Navigation Act. nothing in the bill inconsistent with this policy. Again the President states, in his Message, the difficulty, nay, almost the impracticability of enforcing the non-intercourse law; but it certainly cannot be considered from any part of the Message that, in the event of the repeal of the nonintercourse there is nothing to be substituted. To carry on negotiation, and to aid it, this bill has been thought proper to be introduced. Our commerce has been attacked by French decrees and British orders. This bill proposes resistance, and a determination that, in defiance of these decrees and orders, we will have commerce. The first great question to be negotiated between Great Britain and the United States is the outrage on the Chesapeake. The honor of the nation is most materially involved in this atrocious act. I ask gentlemen if they are prepared to abandon entirely all idea of reparation for this base, cowardly, and murderous attack? If not, they must give their consent to the first and second sections of the bill, because they have an entire and intimate connexion with that affair. When that infamous outrage was committed, what was the measure promptly adopted by the then President? To interdict, by proclamation, the armed vessels of the British from entering our waters. When Mr. Rose came here he made it, at first, a sine qua non that the proclamation should be suspended before reparation should be made; but, afterwards, he did consent that the withdrawing the proclamation and the reparation should be contemporaneous, provided our Government would first, as a reparation due to the British nation, make a degrading concession for the molestation of the boats at Hampton, and should further, basely concede that the men taken out of the Chesapeake were British deserters. These disgraceful concessions our Executive would not, nay, could not make. Of course, the negotiation was broken off, and Mr. Rose returned, as it must have been originally designed by the British Ministry he should, without making any atonement. Reparation is then offered in the arrangement with Mr. Erskine. That act is disavowed, and at this moment atonement remains to be made. Congress, after the arrangement with Mr. E., by a law of last session, under a full confidence that England would not be guilty of a violation of faith, which has few parallels in history, withdrew the interdiction. As we are precisely in the situation with regard to the affair of the Chesapeake, we were in at the time of the issuing of the proclamation of the President, the first and second sections of the bill then propose to put the country in the precise state it was in at the time prior to the arrangement with Mr. Erskine. But it not only restores that state of things, but is precautionary as to the future. It has been well observed, sir, that if these sections are stricken out, and British vessels permitted to enter our waters, they would come into our ports before our towns without resistance. If entrance into our waters be interdicted, their very approach may be rendered more difficult, and by resistance prevented altogether. We are all well aware that JANUARY, 1810. the Copenhagen firebrand is still among us, enjoying Anglo-American hospitality. Were we to strike out the first and second sections of the bill, in this view of the subject, our seaports might be endangered. I, therefore, consider the first and second sections of the bill important in relation to the affair of the Chesapeake; and, alse, as a precautionary measure with relation to the safety of our seaports, and as it regards too the honor of the nation. With respect to the third section, and all the other sections to the ninth, including the section proposed to be stricken out, the policy of their provisions will be evident by a fair investigation of the subject. To obtain a regard to our nea tral rights, and to resist the French decrees and British orders, which, under pretext of retalistion, proclaimed in effect to the world, that there should be no neutrals and no neutral rights, the embargo was resorted to as a coercive measure; and I have no hesitation in declaring my opinion, that but for English emissaries, factious intrigues, and the want of virtue demonstrated among that class of citizens whom it was designed protect, it would have effected its intended object. What was the operation of it? Its great prides ple was non-exportation. The provisions neces sary to carry it into effect operated upon our owa citizens. From the unmerited clamors against and from the causes I have stated, it was aban doned. Non-intercouse was substituted, its great principle being non-importation. It was taken instead of an absolute repeal of the embargo, which was then, from the complexion of the House, seriously apprehended, which, by many was considered absolute submission, and the no intercourse still held up resistance such as it was Gentlemen well know the unpleasant circum stances under which it was resorted to. In consequence of the difficulty of carrying its provision into effect, and the scandalous evasions practised under it, it has become in a great degree inopera tive. In the present state of things, the carrying trade is principally thrown into the hands of the British, through Amelia island, Halifax, and other places of depot, and thence smuggled into the country. Where, then, does the American met chant go to obtain British manufactures? Not to England, but to those entry-ports. Through these, too, British vessels have the carriage of a your produce. In fact, England, by the evasions practised under your laws, has nearly a monopoly of your carrying trade. Facts bear me out la this statement. I have seen a letter from a per son of confidence, stating that, at Amelia island alone, at this very moment, there are one hu dred British vessels, and the produce of the Uni ted States is strewed along the shores for exportation in them, and that large contracts bave been entered into by American merchants to supply British vessels with the produce of the United States. The American carrier derives no advan tage but the carriage to Amelia island. It is thence carried to Europe in British bottoms ask gentlemen if this state of things can or ought to be tolerated? If gentlemen are prepared ANUARY, 1810. American Navigation Act. ay that American produce shall be carried to Amelia island and there deposited, and thence hall be carried in British vessels, exclusively, to foreign market; and that the farmer shall sell is produce subject to a deduction for double eight and double charges, and that the British erchant shall have the benefit of the exportaon of our products, they will vote for striking ut the sections in the bill, which cut up this bominable trade. H. OF R. commerce, but that we will have it solely and exclusively to ourselves. Sir, I do not mean, nor can it be meant by other gentlemen, that we should stop here. We will, as I have said, have commerce, and a monopoly of it. We will, also, if necessary, take a further step. After determining and resolving to have commerce, I will agree to force it. How to force it? Some say by convoy, and some say by arming our merchant vessels. I shall, after the determination to have commerce, be ready to determine to use arms in support of it, and to give our merchants also power to arm. Commit yourself to have commerce, sir, and you must go further. You must protect it by convoy, by arming your merchantmen, by any way ingenuity can devise. This is but one great step in the system. We are to determine and proclaim to the American people that we will have commerce. If it be considered that that commerce will be in danger, it is for the wisdom of Congress to point out a remedy or a means of enforcing our right to it. Gentlemen have asked what good is to result om this section. One great good will be its utting up this trade entirely. By the fifth secon, no articles the growth, produce, or manufacure of any foreign nation, can be imported into he United States, except immediately from the ountry where it is grown. The bill classifies oreign countries, and prohibits the importation Com any one class of any articles which are not f the growth, produce, or manufacture, of that lass. If this section remains, you cannot import Tom Amelia island any article of British manfacture, for it would be liable to seizure. But The motion now before the House involves, in entlemen may say that British goods are now my opinion, a question of the last moment to the iable to seizure, and yet find their way into the interests of the United States, and as such I apountry. But, sir, the embargo and non-inter-proach it with great seriousness. I do conceive ourse differed from the present bill in this repect. The embargo and non-intercourse operted on your own citizens, and the feelings of our itizens were excited in favor of their fellowitizens, violators of the laws. The great priniple of the present law is, that it is to operate on oreigners. There are in the bill no penalties and orfeitures; nothing but condemnation of vessel nd cargo. And I call upon gentlemen to name ne instance where a foreign vessel has been arested in the violation of the laws of the United States, that a condemnation has not taken place. The Admiralty Courts of the United States have iniformly enforced our laws, and will do it still. These cases are not tried by a jury, but wholly y a judge, who has power to sift a case to the ottom; and, the violation being proved, a conemnation takes place. Foreigners only can be ufferers by the bill. The courts can be trusted with enforcing the laws of the United States, and very infraction of this law will be punished by hem. They are and will be competent to it. From this view of the subject, it is very appaent that this law will operate on a trade disraceful to those carrying it on, and disgraceful our country. If it have no other good effect, will remedy the evil under which we now bor. But, sir, the provisions of this bill are calcuted to give to our citizens the whole carrying ade of the products of the United States, and he import of all the articles that are useful to Je United States. Under the embargo we had o commerce; under the non-intercourse law, the estrictions are such as to prevent our commerce om having a full range. The object of this bill to give to our fellow-citizens the exclusive moopoly of the carrying trade, and of bringing very necessary into the United States. We take e strong ground not only that we will have 11th CoN. 2d SESS.-38 that the motion now before the Committee involves the question, whether the Congress of the United States will abandon commerce. I have no hesitation in saying and believing, and when I examine it I believe I can convince the House, that this question is not propounded too broadly. Pass the twelfth section of this bili, repeal the non-intercourse, and then stop; have no substitute. I have heard no gentleman propose a substitute. If you stop there, you sacrifice the best interests of the country, abandon all commerce, consent to give up the ocean, and there is an end to any attempts hereafter to restore commerce to any kind of consequence whatever. The consequence will be this: England will not pass a law or issue Orders in Council to shut her ports agaist you. No, sir. She is well skilled in all commercial matters, and in adopting measures to promote her own commerce and shackle the commerce of the world. We know it from woful experience. What will be the course she will pursue? What is she now in the enjoyment of? The carrying trade of all your commerce to and from your coasts. Will she abandon it? No, sir. Will she, if you repeal the non-intercourse, suffer you to enjoy one particle of trade more than you have now? She will not. What will suggest itself to them to secure the present state of things which they now enjoy and will not abandon? When you repeal the non-intercourse, she will enact discriminating duties; she will exclude your vessels from participation in trade. The prices in Europe for American produce will not bear any advance at all, so as to be exported subject to a discriminating duty. You would cut off from the citizens of the United States the carrying of their own produce. I ask gentlemen if this be an extreme case? if it be not substantial ground? If she does not shut her ports against you, she can resort to as effectual a measure. |