gerents, and it would seem from what he hints, one-half of the channel of your rivers is that the offer to France, in case she repealed opened, the other is to be embargoed; and her decrees, was to join her in the war against vessels may proceed to sea, but they must not England. It cannot be denied that we have pass through the embargoed waters. I can well lost more by the spoliations, and have been more conceive of one port in the United States being harassed under the arbitrary edicts of France, embargoed and the others open: but of an than of England. By the treaty of 1800, we embargo which gives the right to every vessel gave up more than twenty millions of dollars in a harbor to leave it, I confess I have no comwhich had been seized, and, against all right, prehension. I should have supposed that the confiscated in France. Since that time, we honorable gentleman might have ventured to are officially informed, that an amount nearly repeal the embargo generally, and trusted to equal has been seized and confiscated or seques- the provisions on the subject of non-intercourse tered. She has wantonly burnt our ships on to accomplish what seems to be the object in the ocean and made no compensation. Her view, in partially retaining it. Sir, it is a Berlin decree of the 21st of November, 1806, strange infatuation, that the name of this odious commenced the present system of outrage upon measure should be preserved, when the thing neutral rights. In effect, it interdicts all trade itself is abandoned. with England and her colonies. This is followed by the Milan decree of the 17th of December, 1807. Under this edict, an American vessel which has been searched or visited against her will, by a British cruiser, or is proceeding to or returning from Eugland, is liable to be captured as good prize. And finally, to complete this monstrous system, comes the Bayonne decree, the 17th of April, 1808, which declares every American vessel found upon the ocean liable to seizure and confiscation. Opposed to these accumulated violations of our neutral rights, what steps has our government taken against France? Have they passed a non-importation act, issued a proclamation, or imposed an embargo? The last measure is general in its terms, but is avowedly against England alone. No, they have contented themselves with memorializing, remonstrating and protesting. Against England we took every step short of war, against France we have employed nothing but gentle words. Has your government then shown an equal resentment against the wrongs suffered from these two powers? It may be froir the habit of enduring; but we do not feel an aggression from France with the same quickness and sensibility that we do from England. Let us see, sir, the same conduct observed with regard to both belligerents; let us see the impediments to a friendly settlement with Britain removed; let us witness a sincere effort made to regulate the intercourse of the two nations by a treaty, formed on principles of mutual concession, and equal interest, and I will answer for it, if Great Britain persists in her orders, that you will find no division in this country on the question whether we shall submit to them or resist their execution. Permit me, Mr. President, to detain you a few moments longer. I am sensible that I have already trespassed upon the indulgence of the Senate, and I shall hasten to conclude the remarks which I have thought it of importance to make upon the resolution which has been submitted. And what, sir, are we to gain by a non-intercourse? It can never benefit the nation; it is nothing more than a part of that miserable musquito system, which is to sting and irritate England into acts of hostility. I have no doubt she sees the object, and she will take care not to give us the advantage which would be derived from war being commenced on her part. But I ask, what will be the effect of non-intercourse? I see no other than that it will require two voyages instead of one, to transport our produce to the markets of the interdicted countries. You carry your merchandise to Lisbon, and there deposit it; and from thence it is carried in foreign ships to England and France. Who will pay the expense of this circuity of transportation? The United States. It will be deducted from the price of your produce. Can the gentleman contrive no system which will operate with less severity upon ourselves than upon those whom he deems our enemies? If the resolution has no design, but what is apparent on the face of it, it is evident that its sole operation is against ourselves. Its inevitable effect will be to reduce the profit of what we have to sell, and to increase the expense of what we have to purchase. I can perceive also, sir, that it will be a measure of unequal pressure upon different sections of the country; and that its weight will fall heaviest upon that part of the Union already too much galled to suffer any addition to its burden. The lumber, the live stock, the fish, and the articles of common exportation to the eastward, will not bear the expense of double freights. Will they thank you for repealing the embargo, and adopting a substitute which continues to shut the ports of the north, while it opens those of the south? Will they thank for a measure which deprives them even of the miserable consolation of having fellow-sufferers in their distress? If this resolution be adopted, you do nothing to heal the wounds which you have inflicted. If New-England loses her trade, she will derive no comfort from its being under a non-intercourse, and not under an embargo law. It is a part of the resolution, that we are to import no produce or merchandise from England, or France, or their colonies. you The objects of the resolution are embargo, non-intercourse and non-importation as to England and France, and their colonies. The existing embargo is to be repealed only in part; | expect, sir, that a law, to this effect, could ever Do you be executed in time of peace? As to the manufactures of England, she can make them the manufactures of any country in Europe: she will give you the exact marks, and stamps, and packages of any place to which your trade is open, and she will defy you to distinguish her fabrics from those they attempt to imitate. But, sir, the consequence chiefly to be dreaded from such a measure, would be the practice of smuggling, to which it would certainly give birth. Can you expect in one moment to change the habits of a whole country? We know, sir, the power of habit: it is a second nature. Can an act of Congress instantly change your nature? No, sir, they who can afford it, will have what they have been accustomed to. They will pay any price for articles, without which, perhaps, they can scarcely exist. Smuggling must follow, and will follow with forgery and perjury in its train. It is the honor and character of your trading people which now protects you from smuggling. Break down this sentiment, habituate them to perjury, destroy the disgrace attached to this violation of your law, and you lose half the security and means you have in the collection of your rev enue. The complaint has been made, that while we find fault with the measures proposed, we refuse to point out the course we would have the administration to pursue. I have, sir, no hesitation on my part, to disclose my opinion, or to offer the humble assistance of my advice on the subject. In a few words, I will tell you what I would do; place England and France upon the same footing, by repealing the non-importation act, rescinding the proclamation, and repealing the embargo. Then ask for, and insist upon adequate reparation for the affair of the Chesapeake. Make a treaty with Great Britain, if as good terms could be obtained as those in either of the treaties which have been refused. Agree to resist the execution of the Berlin decree, and if she afterwards persisted in her orders in council, declare war against her. Such would be my course. War would be the last resort; and I believe, in my conscience, we should never be driven to it, if the course were pursued with a sincere disposition to preserve peace. Permit me, sir, to notice one remark of the honorable gentleman from Virginia, which had escaped me, and I am done. The gentleman told us, that the removal of the embargo was designed as a concession to our eastern brethren. I rejoiced to hear this sentiment of forbearance. Such sentiments give hopes that the Union may still be preserved. We have been led to the brink of a tremendous precipice; another false step, and we shall be lost in the abyss. Our safety is in treading back our steps. We have lost our way. Some ignis fatuus has beguiled us. There is a path of safety and honor-the path the nation once trod. Let us endeavor to regain it, and invoke the spirit of WASHINGTON to lead us once more into it! THE ARMY AND NAVY.* We have been reproached for having voted for an increase of the navy, while we are opposed to any augmentation of the army. I did vote for the four additional frigates, and I should have been willing to vote for four shipsof-the-line. The United States require, for the protection of their territory, a standing army of a certain amount. Our present military establishment exceeds ten thousand men. These are designed for the security of our persons and property upon land; and is not the person and property of the citizen entitled to protection on the ocean? God has decided that the people of this country should be a commercial people. You read that decree in the sea-coast of seventeen hundred miles which he has given you; in the numerous navigable waters which penetrate the interior of the country; in the various ports and harbors scattered along your shores; *This extract is taken from Mr. Bayard's Speech in the United States Senate, on the twelfth of February, 1810: on the "bill to engage a corps of volunteers for a short period in the service of the United States." in your fisheries; in the redundant productions of your soil; and more than all, in the enterprising and adventurous spirit of your people. It is no more a question whether the people of this country shall be allowed to plough the ocean, than it is whether they shall be permitted to plough the land. It is not in the power of this government, nor would it be if it were as strong as the most despotic upon the earth, to subdue the commercial spirit, or to destroy the commercial habits of the country. Young as we are, our tonnage and commerce surpass those of every nation upon the globe but one, and if not wasted by the deprivations to which they were exposed by their defenceless situation, and the more ruinous restrictions to which this government subjected them, it would require not many more years to have made them the greatest in the world. Is this immense wealth always to be exposed as a prey to the rapacity of freebooters? Why will you protect your citizens and their property upon land, and leave them defenceless upon the ocean? As your mercantile property increases, the prize becomes more tempting to the cupidity of foreign nations. In the course of things, the ruins and aggressions which you have experienced will multiply, nor will they be restrained while we have no appearance of a naval force. I have always been in favor of a naval establishment-not from the unworthy motives attributed by the gentleman from Georgia to a former administration, in order to increase patronage, but from a profound conviction that the safety of the Union and the prosperity of the nation depended greatly upon its commerce, which never could be securely enjoyed without the protection of naval power. I offer, sir, abundant proof for the satisfaction of the liberal mind of that gentleman, that patronage was not formerly a motive in voting an increase in the navy, when I give now the same vote, when surely I and my friends have nothing to hope, and for myself, I thank God, nothing to wish from the patronage it may confer. You must and will have a navy; but it is not to be created in a day, nor is it to be expected, that in its infancy, it will be able to cope foot to foot with the full grown vigor of the Navy of England. But we are even now capable of maintaining a naval force formidable enough to threaten the British commerce, and to render this nation an object of more respect and consideration. In another point of view, the protection of commerce has become more indispensable. The discovery is completely made, that it is from commerce that the revenue is to be drawn which is to support this government. A direct tax, a stamp-act, a carriage tax, and an excise, have been tried; and I believe, sir, after the lesson which experience has given on the subject, no set of men in power will ever repeat them again, for all they are likely to produce. The burden must be pretty light upon the people of this country, or the rider is in great danger. You may be allowed to sell your back lands for some time longer, but the permanent fund for the support of this government is the imports. If the people were willing to part with commerce, can the government dispense with it? But when it belongs equally to the interest of the people and of the government to encourage and protect it, will you not spare a few of those dollars which it brings into your treasury, to defend and protect it? In relation to the increase of a permanent military force, a free people cannot cherish too great a jealousy. An army may wrest the power from the hands of the people, and deprive them of their liberty. It becomes us, therefore, to be extremely cautious how we augment it. But a navy of any magnitude can never threaten us with the same danger. Upon land, at this time, we have nothing-and proba bly, at any future time, we shall have but little -to fear from any foreign power. It is upon the ocean we meet them; it is there our collisions arise; it is there we are most feeble, most vulnerable, and most exposed; it is there by consequence, that our safety and prosperity must require an augmented force. |