Page images
PDF
EPUB

H. OF R.

NON-INTERCOURSE.

[blocks in formation]

suing letters of marque dependent on the events The House went into a Committee of the which in the opinion of the President should renWhole, on the bill from the Senate for interdict-der the commerce of the United States sufficiently ing commercial intercourse, &c. Mr. MASTERS's motion for striking out part of the eleventh section being yet under consideration.

Mr. J. G. JACKSON moved to strike out the whole of the section preceding the proviso, for the purpose of inserting the following amendment: "If after Great Britain or France shall revoke such of their orders or decrees, laws, or edicts, as violate the lawful commerce and neutral rights of the United States,

of which revocation the President of the United States

shall give public notice by proclamation fixing the time, which shall be at the expiration of fifty days from the date thereof, when the operation of this act and also of the act laying an embargo, &c. shall cease and determine; and the President of the United States shall at the expiration of the time limited in the said proclamation issue letters of marque and reprisal against the nation which shall continue in force its unlawful edicts against the commerce of the United States."

The reason he assigned for it was not a hostility to the principle, but that, as the section now stood, it gave the President a discretionary power to judge of the time at which the commerce of the United States would be safe enough to warrant the withdrawing the embargo as relates to either Power, &c.

Mr. RANDOLPH called for a division of the question on striking out, so as to take the question distinctly on striking out the two clauses of the section.

safe, &c.

Mr. J. G. JACKSON renewed his motion to strike out the whole section, except the enacting clause. He acknowledged the justice of the arguments of the gentleman from Connecticut; but as a session of Congress would intervene, the objection to the defect in detail would fall to the ground. The amendment which he intended to offer, would remove the remainder of the gentleman's objections. Mr. RANDOLPH called for a division of the motion at the same point as before. He said if the Senate had erred, the error was not to be remedied by the proposition submitted to the House. It was only putting a tortoise under the elephant; for the system would be liable to precisely the same objections as the clause proposed to be amended. Mr. R. went into an examination of the amendment which Mr. JACKSON read, to show that this was the case. It was in fact the same point now which the House had under consideration a few days ago-a declaration of war in futuro, leaving it to chance as to whom and how war was to be declared; with a mental reservation at the same time, that all this was mere pen, ink, and paper. It was complying with the object of those very belligerents whom it proposed to resist, viz: involving us in the war-setting the nation up to the highest bidder, the kindest keeper. Was this dignity? Was this the spirit of 76? He described this bill from the Senate as a new alternative, never discovered by the Committee of Foreign Relations, who had some time ago presented three of them to the House. He spoke of the proceedings of the present session. It has been said (observed Mr. R.) that this House has Mr. DANA objected to the clause for a variety been acting under a panic; and allusion has been of reasons, because it delegated to the President made to a particular quarter of the Union as the power which belonged to Congress only, by mak- cause of that panic. I trust, sir, that the members ing him judge of what "pledges and precautions" of this House will think it more honorable to were suitable;" that it authorized the employ- themselves, if they are to be influenced by fear, ment of private force in a case in which the pub- and I hope they are not, to yield to the wishes lic force was not to be employed, which is a nov- of a great and respectable portion of the Union, elty; it contemplated not actual war but invited than, after having expressed a disposition to gratindividual enterprise; it was therefore a mere ify that section, to be whipped in by an editorial menace, going upon the principle that private paragraphist. It has been truly said that the vessels might be authorized to make reprisals Government of France was destroyed by the Parwhere the public force was not presumed to be liaments putting the galleries in the place of the employed; it was therefore a measure unworthy house, by legislating under the hisses or applauses of the Government, and unknown in the history of the galleries. This was a horrible state of of nations. The construction of the section too things. But if any body of men is to legislate was singular, and he was astonished that such a under hissings, where is the difference, whether bill should come from the Senate. It made no they come from the galleries, or, from really the regulations as to what disposition should be made most worthless part of the community? Wheof the property captured by these vessels, whether ther from an individual who arrogates to himself declared good prize or not, &c. It was a mere not merely the right, which as an individual and vague proposition, and unworthy of the Govern- freeman he has of judging of the conduct of this ment, as it proposed war by individuals while the House, but of prescribing what it should do? And nation shrunk from the contest. He objected when, sir, I indulge in these observations I feel a also to the condition on which letters of marque repugnance at comparing such an audience as I were to be issued-that on one nation's ceasing see around me to persons of that description. to wrong us, we should agree to fight another. The foreign difficulties in which we are now inHe objected to it too, because it transferred to the volved, Mr. R. attributed to our own oversight; President a legislative power, by making the is-to the rejection of a treaty which might have

The question was taken on striking out the first clause of the section, and negatived, 52 to 47. The question then recurring on striking out the second clause, being precisely the motion of Mr. MASTERS,

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

been formed. The renewal of Mr. Jay's treaty, or the acceptance of that negotiated by Mr. Monroe, would, he conceived, have placed the United States in a situation far preferable to that in which it now found itself. But, instead of that, our Government had searched the volumes of Puffendorf, Marten, Vattel, &c., and produced whole volumes of diplomatic correspondence. He said he could. almost wish that the curate and barber would come into the library and make a bonfire of all the rubbish which had led us to this windmill ex. pedition. With regard to our domestic difficulties, Mr. R. conceived that they were all of our own creation; that they had been produced by ill-judged conduct. He compared the present and late situation of this country with that of Great Britain under the administration of Lord North. He said Congress were not now, like Macbeth, in a situation where to go on was as easy as to retreat. He expatiated on their present difficulty; and condemned the policy which had prevented the House from agreeing to the proposition of Mr. CHITTENDEN, to repeal the embargo at the commencement of the present session. If they now intended to modify the embargo at all, he begged of gentlemen, for God's sake, for the love of country, taking warning by the past errors of their former masters, (the Ministry of Lord North,) not to retain one iota of that obnoxious principle which had put this continent in an uproar. Rather than continue it, he would join any man in war, however averse he might be to war. And he was opposed to war; but, put the embargo in one scale and war in the other, he would take war-and why? Because foreign war was better than domestic war. He said that this nation could not go to war with a formidable minority against it. The bill before the Committee might bring on war, though it was not intended. Yes, sir, said he, it may bring us to fighting and to disgrace; it is something like dressing ourselves up in a dough-face and winding-sheet to frighten others, who may blow our brains out at the moment we suppose them in the height of their terror.

Mr. J. G. JACKSON observed that it was his opinion that it would be more to the honor of the nation to persevere in the embargo until they went to war; but the majority of the House appeared to be of opinion that neither course was proper. That being the case, he was willing to make the ground as tenable as he could, so as to avoid downright submission. He replied to various observations made by gentlemen who had spoken on the subject. In relation to domestic difficulties, he should be as little influenced by attacks through newspapers, as by popular meetings, enlisting the people with arms in their hands, in opposition to the Government. In relation to the treaty negotiated by Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney, he said that the rider attached to that treaty gave a license to the British Government to pursue the very course which now produced our difficulties, and Mr. Canning maintained that to have been the construction of it. Mr. J. said that he was not yet prepared for burning the law of nations, and substituting force for law. As to

H. of R.

violations of the embargo or of the proposed system, he observed that all laws restraining the actions of men would be more or less evaded; this, therefore, could be no argument against any law proposed; the same objection would lie against a law for the punishment of murder. Mr. J. spoke for about half an hour.

The question was then taken on striking out the first clause of the section, and negatived-56 to 48.

The question recurring on Mr. MASTERS's motion for striking out the remainder of the section, relating to letters of marque and reprisal, Mr. LYON spoke in favor of striking out the clause.

Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS, viewing this section as a measure contemplating further negotiation, was wholly opposed to it. It said to Britain, "we will dismiss every other cause of quarrel with you, if you will revoke your Orders in Council." It told our poor sailors, incarcerated in their "floating hells," that we were ready to abandon them. The surrender to her of the right of impressment, and of even other rights previously in contest, was offered as the purchase-money for the revocation of the Orders in Council; and he blushed for his country, that such a proposition should be seriously entertained in this House. He would declare war to-morrow most heartily. He would vote for a section for immediately issuing letters of marque and reprisal, but he would not barter away our rights for the revocation of the Orders in Council. If we were to submit, he wished to do it in that way which should carry so much destruction into the families of those who cried out so loudly for the repeal of the embargo, that they would rally round the Government in support of the country's rights.

Mr. EPPES, too, was of opinion that there was no honorable course left for this country but embargo or war; but a majority of the House having overruled his opinion, he must acquiesce in their decision. But he could not consent to adopt the measure proposed by this section, which, under whatever aspect he could view it, appeared calculated to produce no effect but disgrace and ruin to the country. It could only be used in one of two ways, either as an instrument of negotiation or as a measure of war. Mr. E. used some arguments to show that, as an instrument of negotiation, proposing to each Power to pass over all former injuries if it would withdraw its last infraction of our rights, and, besides so doing, to go to war with its enemy; whatever might be the result, it could produce nothing but ruin and disgrace. It reminded him of a physician painted blind, with a club in his hands, his patient on one side and the disease on the other; striking at random on each side, he killed the one to which chance directed the first blow. And as a measure of coercion, what was it? Not old-fashioned downright war, but war depending on a contingency. It was a golden apple held up to the belligerents to be adjudged to the swiftest in receding. Upon the humor or whim of Talleyrand or Canning, when they received the proposal, aris

[blocks in formation]

ing perhaps from an undigested dinner, was to depend our war with either France or England; and we are to present ourselves as a courtesan to the polluted embraces of England, or be fixed on the imperial car, in either case bribing France or England by going to war with the enemy of the one which should be the first to embrace our offer. Whichever should accept it, disgrace and ruin must be the result. Rome, at one time, was said to want nothing but a bidder; but Rome had its age of virtue. Mr. E. said that it seemed as if we, in our very infancy, had all the degeneracy of the latter days of old Rome. If there was not firmness enough to take a manly attitude, he hoped the House would not take this thing as a substitute for it.

FEBRUARY, 1809.

Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS rose to rescue himself from an imputation of intending directly to harass the bill by this amendment, because he intended eventually to vote against it. He solemnly abjured any such an intention. Any member who would at this time make such a motion, with a view to embarrass the proceedings of the House, would deserve a halter. Perceiving that a large majority of this House was determined to repeal the embargo, and not to fight, he had been induced to offer to the House that, which, to his understanding, appeared the best plan that had been presented. Mr. W. offered many reasons against the non-intercourse bill; amongst others, that, instead of being coercive, it would operate as a premium to the navigating interest of Great Britain; that two years' continuance of it would be worth millions to Great Britain; that it also injured the agricultural interest of this country, laying additional obstructions on the sale of its prod

Mr. Fisk was against striking out this clause. After some remarks in reply to Messrs. RANDOLPH and LYON, he said that he regretted exceedingly the situation in which the House was placed; that this clause should be stricken out-uce; that it seemed as though, lest the people for it would be virtually saying that they meant to take no honorable ground, that they would submit. He believed that temporizing would ruin the nation. As to opposition of the people in the East to war on any terms, he said that, excepting a few who had been opposed to the Revolution, and who still longed for British dominion, there were not many who would not join their Government in a war against either Great Britain or France for the maintenance of our just rights.

The question was then taken on striking out that part of the bill from the Senate relating to letters of marque and reprisal, and carried ayes 72.

Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS then proposed his amendment for substituting a discriminating duty of per cent. as a substitute for the non-importation from Great Britain and France.

The Committee immediately rose, without taking a question, and obtained leave to sit again.

FRIDAY, February 24,

On a motion made by Mr. RHEA, of Tennessee, that the House do now proceed to consider a resolution proposed by him yesterday, and ordered to lie on the table, in the words following. to wit: Resolved, That an order of this House of the eighteenth instant, directing "that, until the end of the present session, the daily hour of meeting shall be ten o'clock; and should a quorum not appear, the names of the members shall be called, and those present noted in the Journal of each day," be rescinded:

The question was taken thereupon, and passed in the negative.

NON-INTERCOURSE.

The House went again into Committee of the Whole, on the bill from the Senate for interdicting commercial intercourse, &c. Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS's amendment being under consideration, viz: to strike out that part of the law relating to non-importation, and insert a provision for discriminating duties

should believe the embargo was a wise measure, they were about to pursue the very course which would prevent the people from receiving a conviction of its protecting policy. The course which he proposed would at least prevent this evil, by practically demonstrating to the people the effect of the Orders in Council and Decrees, which were the causes of the embargo.

Mr. SLOAN regretted that this deceptive measure was proposed, nominally contemplating a repeal of the embargo, but which would produce little or no benefit. He described the body politic to be laboring under a disorder, as an individual with a dreadful cancer. When he beheld the situation of this distressed country, he felt it his duty again to address the House, and call their attention to the remedy. Instead of the inveterate passion for war with the belligerents, which existed in a part of the House, he recommended another species of war-a war against the passions-in which, though no friend to war, he had no objection to engage as a volunteer. He agreed with the gentleman from South Carolina, that, if this bill passed, it would be just what the Court of Great Britain would wish. Mr. S. said he should proceed in his remarks without any fear of falling under the late substitute for common law, viz: tar and feathers-even though he was promised "a full suit of homespun from head to foot," by some heroes of Philadelphia, and although he was well acquainted with the power and disposition of the Executives of some States to screen offenders from punishment. Mr. S. stated various objections to the bill. If it were continued long, there would be no occasion for employing a committee to inquire what disposition should be made of the surplus money in the Treasury. He was in favor of Mr. WILLIAMS's amendment, as tending to increase revenue, to promote union, and secure the happiness of the United States.

Mr. LYON also spoke against the non-intercourse system, and in favor of Mr. WILLIAMS's amendment, at some length. Mr. L. was opposed to the bill, as tending to destroy revenue and navigation. He never had wanted a substitute for the ema

FEBRUARY, 1809.

Non-Intercourse.

H. OF R.

bargo-one evil for another. But, rather than mainder of the session would be consumed in continue the embargo, he would take such a mod- debating this bill, and that Congress would sepaification of this bill as that proposed by Mr. WIL-rate without removing the embargo at all. The LIAMS, or even the bill itself. The former plan consequence of such a procedure he deprecated. might be operative on Great Britan, whilst the He had been in hopes, that when the embargo was non-intercourse would be wholly inefficient. repealed, if a substitute was considered necessary, it might be a measure which would benefit the country, and not be equally obnoxious with the embargo. He deprecated the effects produced by these laws on the people, and the consequence which must result from a further continuance of them. He described the New England States. He concluded his observations by reading an extract from the Inaugural Speech of the present President of the United States, the sentiments contained in which he fully approved.

Mr. TAYLOR next spoke on the subject. He considered the bill upon the table not to have the merit of resistance. It was submission to trade in the track pointed out by the Orders in Council. And yet, gentlemen said they would not submit. Could gentlemen so deceive themselves as not to see that they were in fact submitting to the British Orders in Council? It was a surrender of the navigation of the world to Great Britain; it made her the carrier of our produce. That this was the effect, could not be concealed. It was won- Mr. GHOLSON said that the bill on the table was derful that, like the ostrich, hiding its head, and not a favorite plan with him; but, as he should supposing its whole body out of sight, gentlemen probably vote for it, he wished to rescue it from should thrust their heads into a bunch of bram- some of the imputations cast on it. Both the genbles, and suppose that they hid the effect of this tlemen from South Carolina (Mr. TAYLOR and system. Gentlemen said that they would not Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS) had advocated the resolulegalize a trade to Great Britain under the Orders tion reported by the Committee of Foreign Relain Council, at the same time that they authorize tions, proposing this very plan. As to the argua trade with her through the depôts, the circuity ment that this bill operated to carry into effect of the voyage only tending to the benefit of Great the Orders in Council, the same objection might Britain, by giving to her the carriage of our prod- in the same manner be made to the embargo sysuce. Might not Sweden and Spain too want a tem, of which both those gentlemen were strenu little profit, since monopoly was the order of the ous supporters. This argument, therefore, had no day, and impose duties at the entrepôts? It was weight. He denied that we submitted to British a great objection to this system, too, that it could taxation by this bill. For, supposing our produce not be maintained; and he called upon the House to go to the entrepôt, the British capitalist there, not to take a position like this, which their suc-purchasing it, would have to pay in Great Britain cessors might be obliged to abandon with disgrace. the tax on our produce destined for the Continent, France and England could see, as well as our- instead of our paying it. In this way, therefore, selves, that the system could not be maintained; we did not as directly come under the operation and if they should accumulate injuries on our of the Orders in Council, as by trading direct to heads, the sinews of war being relaxed, we should Great Britain. Was there any American who not be in a situation effectually to resist. It was would be willing to resume our usual intercourse also throwing all advantages into the hands of with the belligerents, while all the black cataBritain, whilst France was deprived of any por-logue of our injuries were unatoned? Surely not; tion-being submission to the one and opposition and yet, this appeared to be contemplated by the to the other. The exclusion from French ports, amendment of the gentleman from South Carotoo, would be severely felt by the planters of cot-lina. The discriminating duty would affect not ton; for, besides the loss of a market for such a the belligerents, but our own citizens; it would proportion of the crop, the glutting of the British fall wholly upon the consumers of our imports. market with so large a surplus would depreciate Sooner than trade thus, he would make a bonfire its value enormously. He called upon gentlemen of all our produce, as the gentleman himself had not at this time to give a monopoly to Britain at before proposed in an eloquent speech. It would cur own expense. Desirous to do equal justice to also be a direct submission to trade under the both nations, as we would not fight them, and to Orders in Council: it could not be denied. Comdo equal justice also to ourselves, and not to fol-merce must at some time be resumed. If we were low the very meanderings of the Orders in Council, he was opposed to the bill. He also objected to the phraseology of the bill: "Great Britain and France and their dependencies." Who was to judge what nations were dependencies?-whether the term included Holland, Spain, and Portugal? In relation to Mr. WILLIAMS's amendment, he considered it to be one which the United States could stand by-which would increase our revenue, and have some effect also on the interests of the belligerents. It would be better than any other system proposed as a measure of resistance-would benefit our merchants, and enrich the Treasury.

Mr. GARDNER was apprehensive that the re

to have war, we must have some commerce. Let gentlemen point out a system by which commerce could more honorably be pursued, in the present convulsive state of the world, than it could under the proposed law; for, as it had been observed, in the course of the debate, it was easier to find fault with a system than to invent one.

Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS rose to rescue himself from any imputation of inconsistency. He had been extremely happy when the gentleman rose to hear him avow his intention of rescuing the bill from some of the imputations cast on it, for really it was somewhat necessary, as no reasons had yet been offered in favor of the bill. But he

[blocks in formation]

denied that the gentleman had succeeded in his efforts. The resolution for non-intercourse, which had been adopted at the commencement of the session, had been intended to go in aid of the embargo; it did not contemplate a repeal of the embargo as this bill did, and there was, therefore, no inconsistency in voting for that resolution and against this bill. As to the additional duty being a burden, if the law passed as it now stood and was executed, it deprived the people of the article altogether; if not executed, the premium to the smuggler would amount, in some cases, to 500 per cent. instead of 50 or 25 per cent. And unquestionably it could not be executed; for, notwithstanding the existence of actual war between Great Britain and France, and all the revenue officers and military force of both, the British market had always been supplied with French claret and Spanish wool. The gentleman from Virginia had endeavored to saddle him and his friend (Mr. TAYLOR) with inconsistency because he could not defend the bill-for it could not be defended.

Mr. BACON, however he might be prepared to urge arguments against the bill, said he could not in charity push the argument any further upon gentlemen; for no gentleman had attempted to defend it except the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. GHOLSON.) who, with the characteristic gallantry of a young and active soldier, had done the best he could for it. Mr. B., however, only rose, as he had been alluded to as having an amendment in his possession, to read it to the House. Mr. B. read the following section as an amendment, which, in connexion with other sections containing details, he intended to propose if Mr. WILLIAMS's amendment should be carried: "And be it further enacted, That the commander and crew of any merchant vessel of the United States, owned and navigated wholly by a citizen or citizens thereof, may oppose and defend against any unlawful restraint or seizure not authorized by the customary and acknowledged law of nations, which shall be attempted upon such vessel, or upon any other vessel armed and navigated as aforesaid, by the commander or crew of any foreign armed vessel, and may repel by force any assault or hostility which shall be made or committed on the part of such foreign armed vessel pursuing such attempt, and may subdue and capture the same; and may also retake any vessel owned and navigated as aforesaid, which may have been captured contrary to the customary and acknowledged laws of nations, by any foreign armed vessel."

Mr. B. observed, however, even if the bill should not be amended, he should vote for it, chiefly because the term of its duration was limited, and it might produce a little good.

Mr. J. G. JACKSON conceived that the expedient proposed was even worse than the nonintercourse bill. He rose, however, to expose the evil tendency of the amendment suggested by Mr. BACON, which contemplated giving to mer chants the power to choose what attacks or seizures they chose to consider unlawful, and thus involve the United States with whom they chose. He warned gentlemen against adopting it. If

FEBRUARY, 1809.

war was to be made, let it be declared according to the Constitution.

Mr. WILLIAMS's motion was then negatived, 51 to 50.

Mr. Cook renewed the motion to strike out the same part of the bill, for the purpose of inserting an amendment for arming our merchant vessels as a substitute for it. In support of his motion, Mr. C. urged a number of arguments. He was opposed to the non-intercourse system. There was no fear of the arming system driving the nation into war; for, whatever acts should be committed by our armed vessels, would be the acts of individuals and not of the nation. He had heard from parts of the Union, from people not to be interested in or injured by such a course, cries for war, war, war! At whose expense? Not at theirs, but of those on the margin of the ocean, who all wished for peace. Mr. C. again deprecated the continuance of the embargo, and expressed his concurrence in opinion with Mr. RANDOLPH, that our Administration was pursuing a course somewhat similar to that of Lord North under the British Government. The course which he proposed would promote union, and again unite a divided people. The following is the amendment which Mr. C. proposed to insert:

"And be it further enacted, That, from and after the twentieth day of May next, the merchant vessels owned wholly by a citizen or citizens of the United States, and navigated wholly by citizens of the United States, and not in any part laden with goods contraband of war, and not bound to any port or place actually blockaded and invested, and pursuing a commerce permitted by the laws of the United States, may be armed and equipped, and may defend their neutral rights, by resisting the late decrees of France and orders of Great Britain, which violate the long established rights of neutrality; and may repel by force any assault or hostility which shall be made or committed on the part of any French or British vessel of war, in pursuance of such decrees or orders; and to subdue and capture the same; and to retake any vessel of the United States, owned, navigated, ladened, and bound as aforesaid, which may have been captured pursuant to such decrees or orders by any vessel sailing under French or British colors, and acting or pretending to from the French or British Governments." act by or under authority of such decrees or orders

Mr. HOLLAND thought it would be better at once to withdraw all our measures, to undo everything that had been done, than to adopt the gentleman's amendment. Of all others the system of arming our merchant vessels was the most futile that could be conceived. The merchants would again come forward and call upon the Government to take up the cause. And was the Government again to be duped by them? No; for if the Government had done wrong, in his opinion it was by going too far for the support of commerce; and their efforts were rewarded by the exclamations of the same people, who, by their cries, had induced the Government so to do. Sooner than again attempt to protect them, if they deserted their own cause, he would leave commerce and the rights of the seas to the mercy

« PreviousContinue »